From c807880f7ac73f813b2660ea81a00f7712a4e793 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Lo=C3=AFc=20Hoguin?= Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 12:39:49 +0200 Subject: Add old mailing list archives --- archives/extend/2014-March/000361.html | 95 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 95 insertions(+) create mode 100644 archives/extend/2014-March/000361.html (limited to 'archives/extend/2014-March/000361.html') diff --git a/archives/extend/2014-March/000361.html b/archives/extend/2014-March/000361.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..0140723a --- /dev/null +++ b/archives/extend/2014-March/000361.html @@ -0,0 +1,95 @@ + + + + [99s-extend] Cowboy unexpectedly timing out when reading the body + + + + + + + + + + +

[99s-extend] Cowboy unexpectedly timing out when reading the body

+ Phillips, Christopher + Christopher.Phillips at turner.com +
+ Fri Mar 14 20:07:40 CET 2014 +

+
+ +
  This body is -small-. 48 bytes was my test data (per the
+content-length). That shouldn't take 5 seconds to read, and usually it
+took a millisecond or two, and returned to the client (despite actually
+controlling some hardware across a network and such) within a second. And
+it was ND; I tested this thing a couple of times locally and it appeared
+to work, and even deployed onto a VM it worked some of the time (as I
+said, might have been hardware or some other weirdness).
+
+  So can we only read the body once? Or what's the right approach if I
+want to access the body in both a module registered to the
+onrequest/onresponse callbacks, and in the REST handler?
+
+On 3/14/14, 2:56 PM, "Loïc Hoguin" <essen at ninenines.eu> wrote:
+
+>Cowboy does have a timeout too small, that will be fixed soon (by making
+>it configurable, per body-reading call). It will be in the next release.
+>
+>On the other hand there's something weird in what you said.
+>
+>On 03/14/2014 07:52 PM, Phillips, Christopher wrote:
+>> first check the body with cowboy_req:body(Request) as part of an access
+>> log, then ignore the returned cowboy_req:req() that call passed back,
+>> since we could not then stream the body off of it again. It was working
+>> fine, so I don't think it was related, but it seems more solid now after
+>> I removed it and I don't know if that's related or not.
+>
+>If you ignore the Req being returned, especially after a body-reading
+>call, then Cowboy will not be able to figure out that you actually read
+>it, and will attempt to read it again to skip it, leading to issues.
+>
+>-- 
+>Loïc Hoguin
+>http://ninenines.eu
+
+
+
+ + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Extend +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.3